[Ratmagiclady]

One day the Full Frame Pentax will come and save us all!

[jgredline]

You are right ajuett! It could be just a bunch of hand-me-down stories that someone, someplace, at some point in time, decided to compile and put together in a single book. OR it could be what the book actually says--that it was God-breathed into existence as God's Spirit worked in the minds of 30-some authors to accurately record exactly what He wanted written. Several of the authors readily admit that even they did not understand what it was they were recording and why it was being recorded. But they wrote it down anyway.
But like you said ajuett, it really comes down to faith. What makes the most sense? Are we simply a product of billions and billions of years of evolutionary "progress"; or is there a Master Designer who exists outside our space time contiuum who has displayed His majesty, His order, His eternal plan to the creation that He breathed into existence? It really all comes down to faith!

This is a wonderful post and I could not agree more. The question is ''What if ?''

[Ratmagiclady]

This is a wonderful post and I could not agree more. The question is ''What if ?''

Hi, Javier. That gets on back to 'Pascal's Wager.'

Awfully thin and unlikely 'what if' involved in evolution denial, to 'explain' (poorly) something about why a world doesn't match a book.

"What if" the history and function of the world as it all unfolds, is just as study (ongoingly) reveals, and this only 'contradicts the Divine' if you *insist* it does?

[clmonk]

jgredline wrote: This is a wonderful post and I could not agree more. The question is ''What if ?''

Thanks, jg. Indeed, What if? But that is another question, perhaps for another thread!

[ajuett]

"What if" is an easy rebuttal to any question ever asked. It's like saying "because" when you don't have a clear answer. All the different ideas of how all this life started is daunting. No one I have ever talked to, or ever will, will know the answer. Every now and then it pops into my head "why are we here, etc. I don't think about it a lot, I just live.

[jgredline]

"What if" is an easy rebuttal to any question ever asked. It's like saying "because" when you don't have a clear answer. All the different ideas of how all this life started is daunting. No one I have ever talked to, or ever will, will know the answer. Every now and then it pops into my head "why are we here, etc. I don't think about it a lot, I just live.

Aj, The why we are here, I believe I answered fairly well I believe in one of these 4 threads. I will look for the post. But it takes less faith to believe that a creator created us, that some cosmic explosion in the past.

[Ratmagiclady]

"What if" is an easy rebuttal to any question ever asked. It's like saying "because" when you don't have a clear answer. All the different ideas of how all this life started is daunting.

Why must it be daunting, and what are we being 'daunted' from?

For what?

No one I have ever talked to, or ever will, will know the answer. Every now and then it pops into my head "why are we here, etc. I don't think about it a lot, I just live.

'Just living' is good. 'Why' follows from that, not the other way around, I'd say.


The idea 'You can't know' is only important to those who say, 'All power is there, so you must not! For some other reason involving Book!'

Suppose it arises like a wave, and returns?

Why? Why *not?*



It's kind of like, "You know, if I was going to pick a place to be asking these kinds of questions, out of all infinite combinations, this is the kind of place I would be."

---------- Post added 04-20-2010 at 06:35 PM ----------

Aj, The why we are here, I believe I answered fairly well I believe in one of these 4 threads. I will look for the post. But it takes less faith to believe that a creator created us, that some cosmic explosion in the past.

Actually, it doesn't take *any* faith to say there was some cosmic explosion in the past: We're still in it. Tune your radio to three degrees Kelvin, we're spinning the hits aaaaaaall day!

(It's the idea it 'was' an 'event' that 'created' 'everything' out of 'nothing' that would seem to generate the conflict. But it didn't come from event based time, event-based time itself arises from it. It's all the same 'stuff.' A lot of things we think are 'things' are actually 'shapes.' Like, what's a number? Is it 'real?' Is there a 'thing? ' Why's it so much in reality? It's like 'gravity:' it's not a thing, it's a shape. )

Careful, though, think too much that way, 'God' might get bigger like the rest of observable reality.

I mean, what happens when you picture the 'Big Bang?'

You imagine sitting back 'out there' somewhere and watching from a distance.

That's not what that is. This spacetime we're sitting here experiencing is not only 'in' the 'Big Bang' ....It *is* the 'Big Bang.' All of this time we're spending now, is.... The 'Big Bang.' Not just 'things' but place and time as we know them *are that.*

'Creation' isn't an artifact made and controlled from some outside. It's this. Right here, right now. all of it. 'Seen and unseen.'

---

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 04-20-2010 at 03:52 PM.

[tpeace]

But it takes less faith to believe that a creator created us, that some cosmic explosion in the past.

To my mind, a "creator" would necessarily be far more complex than the thing being created.

I can't follow your assertion that it is more believable to imagine the existence of this more complex "creator" without any apparent concern of how such a complex creative force came into being.

r-t

[Nesster]

But it takes less faith to believe that a creator created us, that some cosmic explosion in the past.

Why does it not take the least faith to believe that the creator used that cosmic explosion to -eventually- create us? And that this creator arranged for that cosmic explosion to unfold (self)awareness so that this cosmos could learn how things unfolded?

[bombo]

If there is a creator (complete nonsense since begging the question of what created the creator becomes circular) he/she/it is the author of very badly written books/scriptures. All those books advertise violence, tell you who to love, who not to love, who to kill, who to take as a slave... It is certainly a shame that these conversations are still taking place in our societies.

my 5 cents!

[jgredline]

Why does it not take the least faith to believe that the creator used that cosmic explosion to -eventually- create us? And that this creator arranged for that cosmic explosion to unfold (self)awareness so that this cosmos could learn how things unfolded?

I have heard this said before and even by some good bible scholars. This gets into the young earther (which is what I am) or an old earther theological views. The biggest problem I have with this theory is that the bible lays out how God created the heavens and the earth. He spoke them into existence. Another problem with this view is that it still adds to the problem of where did God come from, of which no one knows. He simply has always been. So then this leaves us with two problems instead of one.

---------- Post added 04-21-2010 at 09:57 AM ----------

If there is a creator (complete nonsense since begging the question of what created the creator becomes circular) he/she/it is the author of very badly written books/scriptures. All those books advertise violence, tell you who to love, who not to love, who to kill, who to take as a slave... It is certainly a shame that these conversations are still taking place in our societies.

my 5 cents!

I agree that on the surface it has difficulties for some. Can you please point me to the scriptures in question so we can look at the context?

---------- Post added 04-21-2010 at 09:59 AM ----------

To my mind, a "creator" would necessarily be far more complex than the thing being created.

I can't follow your assertion that it is more believable to imagine the existence of this more complex "creator" without any apparent concern of how such a complex creative force came into being.

r-t

And this is why faith is required. Faith from above. This is one of many questions I have for God when I see him.

[ajuett]

This is one of many questions I have for God when I see him.

If god exists, how do you know if it's a he or she? When the bible was written, Men were in charge and women had no rights, no way the "god" could be a woman on paper. Just look at the part of the world now, still backwards thinking, what do you think it was like for women 2000 years ago?

[tpeace]

And this is why faith is required. Faith from above. This is one of many questions I have for God when I see him.

I have no problem with this requiring faith nor that you choose to cultivate such faith.

My issue is with your assertion that:

"it takes less faith to believe that a creator created us, that some cosmic explosion in the past."

That assertion is utter nonsense IMHO.

For your benefit, as a now free-thinking son of a Christian minister I've known quite a few theologists who advise that the difficulty of the test is the proof of the faith.

[clmonk]

Moreso than any of the other "gods", the God of the Bible says that He created both man and woman and that He created them in HIS image. In some very real sense, it takes both male and female to reflect the full image of our God. Both male and female are equally as valuable to God. According to the Bible, He has a role for man and an equally important role for woman. The two are distinct, but equal in His sight.
But the easiest way to determine His gender is to see how He refers to Himself in His revelations of Himself to His prophets. He ALWAYS refers to himself in the masculine gender.

[jgredline]

Aj,
These are very good and logical questions.

If god exists,

I know God exist because of what he has done in my own life.

how do you know if it's a he or she?

We know God is a male because he is always spoken of as a he. Jesus himself who is male said, if you have seen me, you have seen the father. I can post of hundreds of biblical references that show God is a male.

When the bible was written, Men were in charge and women had no rights, no way the "god" could be a woman on paper.

Why not if God was in charge? Scripture id God breathed, not people breathed. But God is a male.

Just look at the part of the world now, still backwards thinking, what do you think it was like for women 2000 years ago?

2000 years ago things changed for women thanks To God himself, the Lord Jesus Christ. Think about it for a minute...Who was the first person Jesus ever revealed himself to as the Messiah? Who was the first person Jesus showed himself to after he rose from the dead? Those two center pieces of the Christian faith where first revealed to women. Jesus has a special place for women. They are precious.

---------- Post added 04-21-2010 at 10:59 AM ----------

That assertion is utter nonsense IMHO.

For your benefit, as a now free-thinking son of a Christian minister I've known quite a few theologists who advise that the difficulty of the test is the proof of the faith.

That is fine. We are each entitled to our own opinion. But as the Son of a Christian Minister (A pk? ) can you please what you mean by ''I've known quite a few theologists who advise that the difficulty of the test is the proof of the faith.'' I just want to be sure I am understanding you.

---------- Post added 04-21-2010 at 10:59 AM ----------

Moreso than any of the other "gods", the God of the Bible says that He created both man and woman and that He created them in HIS image. In some very real sense, it takes both male and female to reflect the full image of our God. Both male and female are equally as valuable to God. According to the Bible, He has a role for man and an equally important role for woman. The two are distinct, but equal in His sight.
But the easiest way to determine His gender is to see how He refers to Himself in His revelations of Himself to His prophets. He ALWAYS refers to himself in the masculine gender.

I agree. Good post.